Generating spatial data for marine conservation and management
- 383 Downloads
Do fishers know best when it comes to identifying areas with rare and depleted fish species? The global conservation crisis demands that managers marshal all available datasets to inform conservation management plans for depleted species, yet the level of trust placed in local knowledge remains uncertain. This study compares four methods for inferring species distributions of an internationally traded, rare and depleted genus of marine fishes (Hippocampus spp.): the use of (i) fisher interviews; (ii) government research trawls, (iii) scientific diving surveys, and (iv) citizen science contributions. We analyzed these four datasets at the genus and individual species levels to evaluate our conclusions about seahorse spatial occurrence, diversity of species present and the cost effectiveness of sampling effort. We found that fisher knowledge provided more information on our data-poor fish genus at larger spatial scales, with less effort, and for a cheaper price than all other datasets. One drawback was that fishers were unable to provide data down to the species level. People embarking on conservation endeavors for data-poor species may wish to begin with fisher interviews and use these to inform the application of government research, scientific diving, or citizen science programs.
KeywordsCitizen science Data-poor Hippocampus Local knowledge Scientific surveys Thailand
This is a contribution from Project Seahorse. The authors would like to thank the National Research Council of Thailand (Permit No. 0002/1306), Thailand Department of Fisheries, Phang-nga Provincial Marine Fisheries Station, Praulai Nootmorn, Tse-Lynn Loh, Sarah Foster, Sarah Harper, and Jennifer Selgrath. We are grateful for the support from numerous dive operators, fishers, and community groups who facilitated our search for seahorses.
This work was funded by the Ocean Park Conservation Foundation of Hong Kong, Riverbanks Zoo and Garden Conservation Fund, the Explorer’s Club Exploration Fund, SciFund Challenge, Bottom Billion Fieldwork Fund, FBR Capital Investments, John G. Shedd Aquarium, Guylian Chocolates and an anonymous donor.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare they have no conflict of interest.
This research was conducted in accordance with UBC Animal (Permit No. A12-0288) and Human (Permit No. H12-02731) Ethics protocols. All participants interviewed gave an informed consent to participate in this research as per UBC Human Ethics protocols.
- Aylesworth L, Loh T-L, Rongrongmuang W, Vincent ACJ (2015) Approaches to locating cryptic and data-poor marine fishes for conservation. In: Fisheries Centre Working Paper Series, vol 100. University of British, Columbia, pp 1–29Google Scholar
- Bohensky EL, Maru Y (2011) Indigenous knowledge, science, and resilience: what have we learned from a decade of international literature on “integration”? Ecol Soc 16:6Google Scholar
- Byg A, Theilade I, Nielsen MR, Lund JF (2012) Local ecological knowledge and its relevance for management and research. Dev Briefs Policy 16:1–5Google Scholar
- Castellanos-Galindo GA, Cantera JR, Espinosa S, Mejía-Ladino LM (2011) Use of local ecological knowledge, scientist’s observations and grey literature to assess marine species at risk in a tropical eastern Pacific estuary. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 21:37–48. doi: 10.1002/aqc.1163 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- CITES (2012) Review of significant trade in specimens of Appendix-II speciesGoogle Scholar
- CITES (2013) Building in-country capacity to undertake non-detriment findings with regard to Hippocampus species in Indonesia, Thailand and Viet Nam. GenevaGoogle Scholar
- Lorenzen K, Steneck RS, Warner RR et al (2010) The spatial dimensions of fisheries: putting it all in place. Bull Mar Sci 86:169–177Google Scholar
- Lymer D, Funge-Smith S, Miao W (2010) Status and potential of fisheries and aquaculture in Asia and the Pacific 2010. RAP Publication, RomeGoogle Scholar
- Morgan AC, Burgess GH (2005) Fishery-dependent sampling: total catch, effort and catch composition. In: Management techniques for elasmobranch fisheries, p 182Google Scholar
- Mundy-Taylor V, Crook V, Foster S, et al (2014) CITES non-detriment findings guidance for shark species: a framework to assist Authorities in making non-detriment findings (NDFs) for species listed in CITES Appendix IIGoogle Scholar
- NOAA (2014) Indian Ocean-South-East Asian (IOSEA) Marine Turtle Memorandum of UnderstandingGoogle Scholar
- Panjarat S, Bennett N (2012) Responses of fishers to a 25-year seasonal closed measure on the Andaman Coast of Thailand, University of Victoria, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
- Rosser AR, Haywood MJ (2002) Guidance for CITES scientific authorities: checklist to assist in making non-detriment findings for Appendix II exports. IUCN, GlandGoogle Scholar
- Stake RE, Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (2005) The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage Publications, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
- Stanley DR, Wilson CA (1990) A fishery-dependent based study of fish species composition and associated catch rates around oil and gas structures off Louisiana. Fish Bull 88(4):719–730Google Scholar
- Tobias TN (2010) Living proof: the essential data collection guide for indigenous use and occupancy map surveys. Ecotrust Canada and Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs (UBCIC), VancouverGoogle Scholar
- UNEP-WCMC (2012) Review of significant trade: species selected by the CITES animals committee following CoP15. UNEP-WCMC, CambridgeGoogle Scholar